Nikon Z7 Review

Nikon Z7 Review

The Nikon Z7 is the company's most well-rounded camera to date: it's as well spec'd and suited for video capture as it is for stills, and the quality of both is impressive. The Z7's design offers an experience that will be familiar to existing Nikon DSLR shooters, but in a smaller, lighter body, built around the all-new Nikon Z-mount.

This is Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless camera: a 4K-capable machine which features a variant of the D850's 46MP BSI CMOS sensor, but with the addition of on-sensor phase detection AF pixels and mechanical stabilization. From our testing the only area where the Z7 comes up a little short is autofocus reliability and usability - something at which Nikon's DSLRs have long excelled.

Key features:

45.7MP full-frame BSI-CMOS sensor with on-sensor phase detection

In-body 5-axis image stabilization (rated to 5EV)

493 PDAF points with 90% horizontal and vertical coverage of the frame

The Nikon Z7 is available now for a body-only price of $3400. It is also available kitted with the 24-70mm F4 S lens for $4000 (many retailers are offering additional kits with the 'F to Z adapter' for about $150 more).

What's new and how it compares

The Z7 isn't just a D850 without a mirror: we look at the key additions and what the Z7 offers.

Comments

I shoot for a living and almost never use any of the things they tested out on jobs, I shoot AF-S 99% of the time for weddings, portraits, and sports everything. Never have a problem with out of focus images. So to me, this is just a so what amount of things I would not be using anyway. I also expect the Z6 to be a little better as well that is what I am getting.

mxx, but even with all the technique, they could never dream of achieving what the current camera technology can achieve. "Spray and pray" is what they do back then in hopes of getting a properly focused shot, much less a perfect shot. They would go through a ton of film. Nowadays, you can shoot 10-20 fps with almost everything properly focused.

This is the same excuse people are giving for the single card slot. Well, back in the film days, I shot rolls and rolls of film and never had a backup....etc. That may have been OK back then, but this is 2018. Offering a "pro" camera with a single card slot is inexcusable. Poor AF is another deal breaker. I wanted one of these, but quickly changed my mind on 8/23 when the details came out.

This is terrible from Nikon. The banding was totally unacceptable but people were making the excuse that Nikon needed it for autofocus (not that the A7Riii needed it) and now it turns out that the autofocus sucks. This is basically a camera with 12 stops of DR and bad autofocus for $3400. What is the point of a full-frame camera if it performs worse than APSC? I'm not a fanboy of any brand. I'll buy the tool that will do the job best for the money and this camera is not it.

I was all set to buy the Z6 because I wanted something smaller than my D800 that could shoot good 4K but now I'm questioning the whole product line. Hopefully, the Z6 uses a totally different sensor design. If not, I'm not going to wait around for another 2 years until Nikon gets around to a refresh.

The reason Panasonic's (and Olympus') current IBIS is so effective is because of the small sensor. The size allows for much more room for IBIS movement, and very low mass to be able to correct for motion faster. Now, build a sensor literally 4x as large (FF), and you'll see that what Sony has already done is excellent. Not even Nikon, with its huge black hole mount, can beat Sony's IBIS rating.

@Mared I can assure you that Canon gets just as much grief. You only have to hang around the Canon R forum to see the daily critical posts from Sony users. They are all over the Canon R like white on rice.

I was out there other evening doing night city photography. One in our group has the Sony A7ii with 50mm Sony prime. She was constantly complaining about her focusing issues. We compared to my Nikon D750 with Sigma 50mm Art, and it really was shockingly bad. Seeing some of her photos later in the group I initially thought they were taken by a cell phone.

Based on what I have seen, and the compatibility with third party lenses, I might look at a D850 in the middle of next year.

The standard Sony 50/1.8 is a nifty fifty. Cheap (in price and build) and pocket sized. If you're comparing a Sigma-anything-recent to it, you're just fooling yourself. Try at least the Zeiss 55/1.8, or step up to the true competitor, the Zeiss 50/1.4. Or just adapt a Sigma 50 Art, where it will perform natively on recent Sonys via adapter. ;)

I found the A7II to be somewhat unusable for my low light photography and sold it soon after. That was back when DPReview published a video claiming that an A7RII was as good or better than a DSLR for low light autofocus.

Nikon is playing a dangerous game of taking its loyal customers for granted...This product should not have been launched with PRO Price Tag!!! Its a highly under par product that pose embarrassment for Nikon against the likes of Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic and Olympus!

Have you handled this Z7? Yes, I have handled it. No, I didn't try the tracking AF. It's not important to me. And if it were, I'd get the best, that's the Nikon D5.

The Panasonic ILCs don't have a particularly good reputation for tracking AF. I hope this isn't news to you.

The tracking AF of some Sony mirrorless bodies is good, not staggering like the D5. Some not. Some awful.

Sorry, but the ergonomics of this Nikon Z7 are, unsurprisingly, better than any Sony mirrorless body. The high end Fujis and Panasonics have good ergonomics, as does the Leica SL, but the first two examples have bodies a bit too small for most hands. And of course of the 3 only one has a full framed sensor in 2018. You do know that this Nikon is full framed and that you've only mentioned one other manufacturer shipping a full framed mirrorless body in 2018? There are 4 in the fall of 2018, two have been in the market for years.

Next time read my comment and understand it. You missed where I said "I didn't try the AF tracking with the Z7".

If you are referencing the A9 versus the Nikon D5. My point was about AF tracking, not frame rates.

Also at very high frame rates the A9 shoots 12 bit raws instead of 14 bit raw. Additionally: It is not the high ISO body that the Nikon D5 is.

Clearly you're not very familiar with either the A9 or the Nikon.

Should having no blackouts be important to you beyond anything else, then the A9 is certainly the camera for you. It is a very well done body, but for all those who don't have minuscule hands, its ergonomics aren't great.

You compared Sony mirrorless to the D5 but when I noted the A9 , you told me I don't know about cameras.Just to let know the Sony A9 tracks better than D5 just go to YouTube there a video about 20 minutes comparing the D5 to the A9 Not only tracking, it beats it in AF speed and low light focusing.

HowaboutRAW's amazing comments are clearly from a certain viewpoint... as is everyone's as well if we are being honest - which no one is. D5 vs A9 / A7III... so close it doesn't matter - and yes I've used them all (low-light wedding work). D5 is better in NO light. Tracking is very close. Add eye tracking on Sony's and, in my opinion, Sony is better. YMMV. Also... D5 is hardly better at 6,500. It's certainly debatable but at that much steeper price! A7III's sensor is better. You go get that D5 buddy.

Also mentions tracking isn't important to him.... who gives a crap what you are into lol. This is about judging specs / performance / price point. Is this that hard to figure out???

You know what I meant - this entire thing is about what one has that the other doesn't and at what price point. Nikon D5 does not have eye AF... that would be in it's negative column vs the Sony's. Ergos are relative but overall you are on point. Nikon is just better at this. Hell... so is Canon and I don't love their decisions. On the A7III I have to use the grip and it still has the lens body tightness on the right side as a big issue. I live with this as it is in no way a deal breaker like one card slot or tracking issues or... you get the point.

@HowaboutRaw,Please note that LessMirrored is a Sony paid employee.Note posting history, date of when he made his profile,lack of equipment in profile, and finally that he only trolls the Nikon and Canon articles and forums, tells you he is a Sony Shill.

PhaseOne ships excellent stills cameras for the studio (this could be an outdoor studio).

However Phase bodies have terrible AF.

I'm not sure why you're bringing them up.

The point of the OP is clearly that the D850 doesn't have the staggeringly good AF tracking of the Nikon D5.

As for theprehistorian's claim about the "best" ever manufactured; that's highly dependent on the intended use. Fuji, Hasselblad, Pentax, and Leica all have medium format camera bodies that challenge Phase in that medium format category, and Leica has the optically best lenses.

Whereas in the full framed DSLR category: prehistorian be ignoring the Sony A99II, Canon 1DX, the Canon 5DII, 5DIII, the Nikon D750, and the Nikon D5, D4S, D700, D3S--and yes, the NIkon Df. Right, not all are current.

2): Nikon D850; Published Nov 25, 2017 | Barney BrittonThe D850's 153-point AF system is lifted from the D5, and while the D5 has the edge when it comes to tracking (possibly thanks to its greater on-board data processing power) the D850 generally performs well, and definitely outperforms its nearest competition.

The whole point of MILC for me is to shoot in AF-C, wide area and face detection and let the camera focus on the face for me. So I can focus on composition, light and subject matter. And my main subjects are my 6yrs old and her 2 yr old brother. This camera will be so frustrating for that type of shooting, PASS.

I don't understand. Isn't the Nikon 1 series had superb AF in a cheap body. How come that Nikon took the best of their learning from the 1 series into the Z, pure bologna. The only thing shinning in this camera is the Sony sensor produced image IQ.

That teeny weeny sensor in the 1 series have a lot of DOF already so acquiring focus is a breeze. Now, a FF sensor, more separation with subject and background, more processing, etc..Totally different animal.

After being attacked by the fanboys for saying negative things about the Z7, it feels darn good to say: I told you so. The Northrups told you so. The Angry Photog told you so. All these Nikon "ambassadors" were full of crap, as suspected.

@MaredYeah, tell me about it! They almost banned me over there. They seriously can't take any criticism. Oh well, it's their loss. The Z7 is an immature product that is generations behind current MILCs.

Steely, you know damn well both those reviewers have no problem roasting nikon when required. They are not ambassadors, and have kissed nikon off often enough. I would trust their chops and review skills over anyone, including here. And I like here.

I am. But I don't post things i know to be false, and only a fool would doubt the skills of Thom and Brad, their work speaks for itself. neither do I go trashing cameras I know nothing about. Unlike someone else in this thread. The Sony A line is pretty fantastic, and I can say that just because Nikons first attempts do not match the Sony, and they don't, to post that the Z is no better than a 3500 is pure bs. From someone that traditionally for many years has slagged Nikon.

"I can't reliably track continuous focus on the Z7 as I can on the D850 (let alone the D5)"

"I either miss focus or I miss shots when my subject is moving all over the place in the frame"

@sandy b - I'm quoting directly from Thom Hogan.

As for DPReview's AF testing, that's probably the area where we've made the most concerted efforts in recent years. 'Back in the day' we didn't test AF at all, really, but these days it's one of our most important and time-consuming tests.

Now if they could only figure out how to get that pesky D850 into stock 1.5 years after launch. Poor Nikon - I wish their shareholders (large ones that mattered) would read some of these comment boards. It would've helped to get these idiots in senior management fired like it should have happened years ago (Key Mission, N1, and the list is long).

I don't get some people when they say they have issues with ergonomics on some cameras. Isn't that the compromise you are willing to take for having a more compact system than the heavier dslr's in the first place? It is like saying, I prefer the rotary dial phones of the 50's because you can hold it like a banana while the ear piece sits comfortably on your ears compared to today's smartphones like holding a piece of cardboard right next to your face.

There are plenty of really well designed mirrorless cameras that are as comfortable to hold as dSLRs whilst being lighter and smaller. Not a one, however, is designed like a hybrid to emphasise that it isn’t a DSLR. Panasonic’s high end GH series is incredible, both with perfect button placement and generally good travel, let alone grip spacing, and comfort.

What I write about the A7III is directly from use. I loved everything about it except how it bit my fingers and forced me to hold it in a way contra-intuitive to its design. And to perhaps shell out for a grip.

I owned the original A7R which I kept on a studio stand. I sold it for a series of Hasselblad digital backs. I now own a GFX and an X-H1, the latter of which is the most depressing camera I’ve ever purchased. I only purchased it because the A7III, which nailed everything else, hurt my hands.

In other words, I am not a stupid brand hater. I cannot get the A7III to feel good or not hurt the hand, and that despite wanting to. It is a wonderful camera in every other regard.

shigzeo - What kind lame little **** actually gets "hurt" by holding a small camera? Now I've heard it all. The world has created the biggest sissy ever. I own an A7R3 and owned a 5DSr. I'm 6'2" and weigh 225 pounds and my photo is attached here. My Sony isn't too small for me to hold and doesn't hurt me either. It's hard to imagine what exactly would cause it to hurt someone...

shi - with the cameras you wrote here it shouldn't be a problem to invest 50 bucks for a grip... The camera "sticks" way better to your hand with it, no way it's hurting (nice round edge at the bottom).I'm 1m85 with big hands...

The finger gets caught between the lens and the mount. If you do any sort of rotation or follow focus or move the camera for action or use flash and unbalance it, or use gloves, the finger cannot fit between the mount and the lens. It rubs, in some cases enough to scrape skin away after prolonged use.

Yes, you can change the way you hold it so that your hand doesn’t follow its natural curves or the curves of the grip and uses the camera more like a gun with an extended trigger, but only because the A7/9 is the only camera on the high end market that is so cramped between the lens and the mount. A grip doesn’t change that.

When I FOLLOW the grip of the camera I don't touch the lens (or frontplate) - but it's quite close, about 3mm. But I can force a different grip and touch the lens. I think this problem is when someone is used the grip of a different/ bigger camera and instinctively uses the same with the Sony. But I totally agree that Sony should give 5-10mm more clearance here - just move the mount a little as Canikon has done!

So far however, Sony are the only one in the high end camera groups to use such a cramped layout. Either they are wrong or everyone else is as regards grip/mount spacing.

So far, the answer from Sony fan is: you’re holding it wrong. That’s a horrible simplification.

And lest I be read as an anti Sony fanboy, I don’t like Fujifilm but I own Fujifilm cameras. I wouldn’t buy a Panasonic until it could focus and follow like the Sony or the Fuji at minimum, so I wait for Sony to truly design their cameras from a functional rather than formal perspective.

The original A7R was a first version too. The biggest wow about it was resolution. Everything else was clearly short of the competition.I would suggest that the Z7 and Z6 are further along the curve than Sony was at this point.

@Photomonkey"The original A7R was a first version too. The biggest wow about it was resolution...I would suggest that the Z7 and Z6 are further along the curve than Sony was at this point."

Sony A7R had no competition when announced - was alone on the market. Now things look very different all together and this kind of AF performance is just unacceptable, especially for the price point!If Nikon doesen't react quickly and remedy the situation via firmware update, this will be very bad for their sales.

The Sony DID have competition. It just had mirrors. Ergonomics have nothing to do with mirror less. A noisy shutter has nothing to do with mirror less. These issues are not present in the new offerings from Nikon and Canon. Their shortcomings are far less significant the Sony brought despite ample visible examples already in the market.

Well, if I wanted a full frame camera, I'd get a Sony A7 III. But fortunately I just don't feel the need for it. I can understand why people who own Nikon FX lenses might want to stay with the same brand, so they could use (most) of the lenses they already own with an adapter.

I still think this is a pretty great camera, especially for a first attempt.

Sony A7 was introduced in 2012. Fuji X-T1 was introduced in 2014. In other words, those cameras are from years ago! Today, you can still buy the A7 for only $798. And a brand new, latest, state-of-the-art X-T3 is only $1499.

Frankly, I never thought I'd live to see the day DPR had this kind of language for any pro or prosumer Nikon camera. It is refreshing to see this balance. (I got a little jaded when non-Nikon brands were consistently and heavily slammed for poor ISO invariance, while Nikon's D5 was let completely off the hook for the very same shortfall.)

That being said, it's too bad that these issues exist for a company that is otherwise on such a roll. I know there was marketplace pressure to create an offering, but it looks like Nikon (and Canon as well) should have taken another year to get it perfectly right out of the box. With all the buzz *still* out there on the D850 and the class-leading D500 crop product, Nikon should have avoided coming out with a not-so-good entry.

Sounds like the AF is really bad, especially in low light. Glad I kept my D850 and didn't buy into the Z7 hype. Nikon's got a long way to go if they want to compete with other MILCs. The price of this thing is ludicrous for the (lack of) performance.

I remember all the vitriol by hardcore Nikon loyalists directed at the Northrups when they posted their YouTube video pointing out the focusing issues during their initial experience with the Z7. Given the price premium Nikon is charging for the Z7 over the D850 and the competition, I feel the Northrup's video was justified in at least giving everyone a heads up before committing their money to a pre-order at that time.

I'm a T&C fan. I'm glad they got vindication here. Well deserved. But, I do also hate when Tony changes his mind on everything - which is best - seems like weekly or monthly. There's a lot of flopping - e.g. Canon 6D2

"Face Detect - available in the Auto-Area mode - is reliable at tracking subjects that are still, but can be confused by movement. We prefer the reliability of Sony's Eye AF"

Yeah, well. You cant use eye-af in video, and with sony face detect you cant activly choose which face you want in focus.

DPReview, i am not sure if this autofocus conclusion is really fair... considering the Face-AF Video, i'd say the Nikon does an excellent job at finding the face... so fast, too! Have you ever tried that with a Sony A7 III ? I feel like its way slower... and like mentioned above.. cripled

You can store up to 9 faces in the memory and prioritize them, so the camera always choses the face with the highest priority in the image. For example save the bride at spot 1 the groom at spot 2 etc... and the camera will always prioritize them over any other face in the image.

You can prioritise face detection on the Sony so that with multiple people in the frame, it only focuses on only the people/person you want. So if someone else walks into the frame af area the focus still stays on your designated person.

"anyone familiar with sony-style LV AF "follow" options for VIDEOknow its NOT specific for a CHOSEN face, but "faces in general" (any FACE that crosses the AF area chosen by user)"

Just tested it on my A6300. While you can't register a face in video mode (understandable, as you can't shoot images in video), you can register it in photo mode first, then set the camera to Registered Faces in video. The camera will prioritize that face in video by highlighting it inside a white box, while any other face is highlighted in gray boxes.

"SONY+NIKON AF points are SPARSELY spread very far apart for its AF to pick to useregardless of the huge area it covers, as chosen by user"

My A6300 has a 17x19 grid of AF locations to choose from in an S size AF box. That's 323 selectable locations, containing a total of 425 AF points. Each S box contains at least 3 PDAF points (might be 5; hard to tell without an HDMI out recording due to the high refresh rate). Go up in sizes to M and L, and the number of PDAF points increases exponentially. Definitely not sparse.

So the same results as August? The tone of this seems to indicate the AF is all but worthless?

Some of the forum pros agree afc can be problematic, but overall it's pretty good. I am hoping it can match my 750, and considering I don't shoot sports, that would be good enough. I saw Brad Hill, noted wildlife shooter, is keeping one. Anyway, some of my fav forum shooters seem to do ok, I will test the Z6, hopefully before Christmas.

I've personally tested the Z7 camera and found exactly the same performance in AF as Dpreview team described. Except the AF points and coverage on the D3400, that entry LV camera focuses much better and reliable compared to the Z7!\Nikon Z7 AF performance is just unacceptable, especially for a camera of this price!

@eno2 I'm calling BS on your statement, while the Z7 can't match the D850 AF for speed, it's more reliable when it comes to focusing 1.4 primes, particularly the notoriously difficult 58mm 1.4 My D5500/D3200 AF is horrid at times with fast primes and I have to go to live view for better AF which is much much slower than the Z7. The lower spec bodies are ok for 2.8 and slower zooms, but to call the D3400/D5500 better than the Z7 is bullhockey...

You should test the camera and convince it for yourself, always!I was very disappointed when tested the AF performance of the new Z7 camera especially in lower light levels. I really hope Nikon acknowledges and remedy it via a firmware update course for the moment it really is as bad as how Dpreview describes it.

That's a trait inherent in mirrorless, not Nikon's doing. When you remove the mirror, you remove any variation in focus precision. Even the slowest of slow AF lenses will consistently focus more precisely at 1.4 on ANY mirrorless than on a 100% precisely factory-tuned D5. That's just how it is. Quite possibly the biggest benefit of mirrorless in general, and the reason I switched.

"My D5500/D3200 AF is horrid at times with fast primes"

Mirror causing variances, and no AF fine tune (thanks for the gimping, Nikon...) to remedy it.

"but to call the D3400/D5500 better than the Z7 is bullhockey..."

For anything that moves, they ARE better. Tests have proven that tracking anything moving leads to a substantially worse hit rates than an average DSLR. For things standing still, it's mirrorless that's making it better, not Nikon. Give credit where credit is due.

I feel like Sony trapped canikon in mirrorless Nikon Z7 and EOS R are not up to Sony standards and that's the best what canikon can do.Again mirrorless is about how good you're at semiconductor , it's not about removing the mirror or future proofing the mount nor make it bigger 😂

All Sony really have to do is make cameras that adults can hold without pain. But they’ve had five years and still are stuck on tiny bodies with horrible feeling buttons and grips too close to the mount.

The tech is all on their side. They nail it all.

But the harder - in some ways - thing is to make a thing that feels good and reliable to use because it mimics as closely as possible the anatomical needs of the body.

I own the X-H1. Okay body. Far better than the A7/9 of any generation but Poor next to Panasonic’s high end stuff and the recent Canon and maybe even the Nikon. I’d not have gone for it had the A7III been nice to fingers and hands.

>All Sony really have to do is make cameras that adults can hold without painI'm 29, I'm fine, thanks.

What does surprise me with all that immature "toy cameras" whining: where were you during the film era? Like, almost every film camera (rangefinder, SLR, Instant) is smaller than A7, has no grip whatsoever and every thing from exp to aperture is mechanically operated from, I'll be honest, strange places and positions. Though look at most Iconic shots of the century, quite a lot of them were made with a rangefinder bodies. Bodies without the proper MF, let alone grip.

I think DSLR era gave us stupid impression that huge ass cameras is a way to go. It isn't in the slightest. Many film photographers are very happy that MILCs are so small, especially Olympus and Sony. And if you don't like A7 grip, buy an added one on Ebay. It's not a problem to make a camera bigger. It's a challenge to make it smaller and more versatile.

The Canon alternative has ergonomic issues as well according to DPR. The Nikon and Canon mirrorless mimic the overall design shape of the A7 series. Maybe this is a consequence of the narrow bodies but DSLR's still seem to be easier to design to be ergonomic.

I have a Sony A77 and ergonomically it is one of the best cameras I have ever had so Sony do know how to do ergonomics.

I have always thought the overall shape and form factor for the A7's (and A6500 types) was a case style over function. Obsessed with being different for the sake of it to differentiate from the SLT line and DSLR's in general and obsessed with small size. Not to say a little retro as well with the A7's.

One day they may realise just because you can make something small it doesn't mean you have to if something slightly bigger offers better ergonomics. Ditto the cameras don't have to be all squared edges.

It’s not about size. I didn’t call Sony cameras toys. I said pain. I have slim fingers and am not a large man. My fingers grind on almost every lens Sony have for the A7 because the mouth and the grip are too close together. I don’t like Fujifilm cameras, but they space things better. Button quality on the Sony cameras is better, but still not differentiated by function the way it is on a good DSLR.

My opinions on the Sony have nothing at all to do with past designs. Had past designs pushed the mount and grip so close (assuming they had grips), I would complain the same. Most did not because grips weren’t a thing until the AF revolution

Which raises the question, why compare manual focus cameras used for vastly different styles of photography to modern cameras like the A9, which simply can’t be used with gloves when it is cold because of spacing, and which impedes even slim fingers?

@ShaiKhulud - You do realize that film cameras didn't have giant LCD screens and 10-15 buttons/dials for camera operation, don't you? Take one of those old film cameras and tack on all that stuff and let me know how that feels in the hand. And your small camera design in defense of all things Sony is moot when all those GM lenses are considered. But keep trolling, I have fun calling you out.

>You do realize that film cameras didn't have giant LCD screens and 10-15 buttons/dials for camera operation, don't you?

They are fit just fine on Fuji, Olympus or Sony (roughly the size of a typical Zenit or Kiev), you know. Not that film cameras were very busy with knobs and displays and not with just cheap rubber leather imitation.

It’s obvious that the small-is-better philosophy only applies to certain photographers, certain genres, and certain places. Mirrorless cameras have gotten bigger and bigger and more full featured and are taking on larger responsibilities all the time.

They have to grow and improve upon previous design/functionality to keep up with new demands. Sony have used the same A7II body for a long time, and it is woefully uncomfortable. It works for those for whom it works, but is not a good design.

Again, which is a bloody shame, as sony mirrorless tech is by far the most robust and utilitarian of any and easily the equal of enthusiast-level dSLRs.

@ozturertI've tested the G9 side by side with the Z7 in exactly the same conditions, both with 35mm lenses (equivalent in the case of the G9).The G9's AF is twice as fast comped to the Nikon Z7, in practice it feels like night and day difference + it hunts less (and that's hilarious cause the Z7 uses phase detect and the G9 only contrast detect AF).The Z7 AF is really disappointing, especially for it's huge price point!

Definitely wouldn't put the A6300/6500 in the same category. A7 III owners who also own of one of those two have stated AF is very similar, putting them on top of the small sensor AF performance category, and now 3rd overall in all of mirrorless (only A7 III and A9 are better).

Panasonic (and Leica SL) AFS is as fast as I’ve used outside a D5, but tracking accuracy and speed certainly are lower than the Z. I do the same test with every camera: ratcheting my body in and out and focusing on a stationary object, or when possible, on repeatably moving objects. And the Panasonic, while blisteringly fast in AFS, cannot track for chickens. The Z7 I tried in the same arena, wasn’t as fast in AFS, but smeared Panasonic’s highest end G series cameras when tracking.

Which is a shame because those Panasonic’s are amazingly easy and comfortable to use.

It's not everything, no. But for me at least, it is the gateway to a technology, unless that technology doesn't require anatomical ergonomics.

The only problem I have with the Panasonic high end cameras is that they can't replace a dSLR or even a higher end mirrorless for tracking for sports or toddler photography. If they were able to, I'd probably be in that world.

As it stands, I opted for the man in the middle: good AF, okay ergonomics, and a tolerable interface. I am a Fuji user looking for options but finding none that are jacks of all trades. Sony tech in a Panasonic body. Done. Yesterday.

It's a few generations ahead of where Sony started out, so I would consider it a job well done for a first FF mirrorless release. The build quality, weather sealing and ergonomics is also better than Sony's top FF cameras, so that's a plus for Nikon. Other than people shooting fast action that truly need high end AFC tracking, I doubt many people would be disappointed and steered away from the Nikon Z cameras. Overall I think the Z models are very well refined for a first attempt. I think they got much more right than they did wrong.

What kind of logic is this? So if a new computer company comes up it would be ok to have 1950-like performance with punch cards?No hate to Nikon, but after their anti mirrorless keynote not long ago (claiming af was not ready when Sony was already nailing it) and what they claimed this is embarrassing.When your main argument is that the technology is not far enough for mirrorless, you cant just enter business with this "not-far-enough-tech" sony had a few years ago.

A dyed in the wool Nikon fan friend of mine just tried out the Z. He came away disheartened. I came away the same but for different reasons. Sony are the one to beat technologically and Panasonic the one to beat for ease of use and logical/comfortable bodies.

One thing I HOPE is different about Nikon now that they finally got into large sensor mirrorless is that IF they find ways to improve AF and other things via firmware, I hope they actually DO go ahead and release those for free like everyone else does (Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, etc). It's come to be expected these days. I think it would be in their best interest to do this. In the past, they have been reluctant to release updates that make big improvements or add features. They normally only fix bugs, but for DSLRs it may not have been such a big deal since their DSLR usually performed excellent right out of the box with no improvements/new features needed.

"Panasonic the one to beat for ease of use and logical/comfortable bodies."

Wouldn't go that far. I have their A6000 competitor, the GX85, and it's pretty bad ergonomically. Mainly for the near non-existent grip and buttons that are hard to find by feel (flush with the smooth body). Needed to get the G9 grip (99% same body shape) in order to use the camera one-handed. Also, the button and dial layout is nearly identical between cameras.

And the menus are just like Sony's, just vertical and in different colors. Same confusing layout to a person new to the system (due to the myriad of options), which you'll eventually learn. Neither is better.

I should have qualified that: their high end range are near perfect. I know next to nothing about their consumer range. Their high range are pretty much as good as a really well designed compact but enthusiast-level DSLR, and in some ways better.

was this taken with electronic shutter?I don't see any banding in the RAWs I took even at +5EV and there are other tests which also failed to reproduce this dpreview "banding" result. Noteworthy is also the fact that if you have to push +6EV, you probably should reconsider the exposure settings in the first place.

It's not taken with electronic shutter. We've seen banding in multiple light sources (and no light sources, in the case of Bill Claff's tests), and with three difference camera bodies. At which point, we're confident that it can occur.

no matter what I do with the z7 images I took I can't get any kind of banding on them when using mechanical shutter. I can see the banding in the RAWs I downloaded from you.But the z7 images I took (converted RAWs) look perfect.

If that is crux of what you say, why say it at all. It can happen to any image from any camera under similar condition. Why don't you produce this for a number of cameras??? I'm not saying you are bias against nikon, your reporting is just inadequate and out of context. You want to report then report properly instead of this "flash news"

I happen not to be fan of mirrorless aside from some travel systems due to my own style of photography

This kind of banding does not exist in any of the FF and APSC Nikons in the list. I think Nikon had to throw Z7 to the market too quickly bec of competetion, but it can be easily overcome with software update. Nikon D7200 is as good as Nikon D850, and the worst DR winner is D5, what a shame for Nikon. Camera companies are still dragging their feet not to use organic sensors, I dont know why.

I am going to keep my D850, because (at the end of the day) it's a better camera than the Z7 *and* the Sony A7rIII ... and is just a pleasure to use ... no banding, no BS, better AF and better sensor performance than both.

However, I will eventually pick up a Nikon Z camera to enjoy the new era of Nikon's lens mount upgrade, but I am going to wait.

I will continue to use and keep the D850 ... and will upgrade to the Z *only* when Nikon brings out the f/0.95 58mm and other super-fast glass to take advantage of the new mount.

I think the Z7 is a fantastic start for Nikon, but I am underwhelmed by their current lens offerings. They look cheap and lame compared to Nikon "Gold Ring" glass; in fact, Nikon lenses now look like Sigma lenses, which is a turn-off to me.

I always thought the Nikon "Gold Ring" glass was the most elegant of any manufacturer, and I don't like the new "all black" look. My hope is that the gold ring is reserved for, and added-back to, the f/1.4 and wider versions.

I have the Z7 but if I had bought the D850 (as I was close to doing some months ago) I would surely skip the Z7 and Z6. However, I hope you mean that the look of the S lenses puts you off, because the image quality is there. I have many pro lenses, this 24-70 is not worse than any of them, its shortcomings are very minor.

Exactly, because I have the D850, I really don't need the Z6 or Z7. I actually prefer the size of the D850 also, I don't want a "child-size" camera.

And, yes, I don't like the look of the new lenses (save the upcoming Noct 58 f/.095, which looks nice). Nikon's gold-ring lenses looked sharp; these new ones look like generic, 3rd party lenses. Canon did a much better job making their new R lenses look refined and "a level up" ... while Nikon's new Z lenses look like they're made by Sigma, and that's not a compliment.

Nikon kept the red hash-mark on their new Z cameras; they should have kept the gold ring on their lenses.

AF & buffer wise D850 is much better, I was also disappointed with z7 in this regards - mainly because the price of the cameras is the same.I don't see any banding in any of the z7 RAWs I took at any amount of + EV compensation and there are other tests which show no banding.I'm not interested in any of the Z lenses, but I need some small camera.

This week Chris and Jordan review the Nikon 24-70mm F2.8 S for Z-mount, a lens many photographers consider to be the foundation of the 'holy trinity' of zoom lenses. Does it measure up to the high expectations set by Nikon? Tune in to find out.

Nikon has made available a firmware update that brings significant improvements to autofocus. But it's continuous Eye AF that's the big headline. Science Editor Rishi Sanyal has given it a go, and finds its performance to be remarkably good... but with some snags.

Latest in-depth reviews

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

The S1H is a full frame mirrorless camera designed with videographers in mind and includes advanced features like 6K video capture, 4:2:2 10-bit internal recording, improved video scopes, high frame rate recording, Panasonic Varicam color science and more.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.